Monthly Archives: March 2009

"Silas commands his thousands, but David, his tens of thousands."

It figures that Kings is getting bad ratings; it’s probably the best television series I’ve ever seen . Both Shakespearian and Biblical, elevating the soap opera genre to its highest potential with a clear moral vision and fantastic acting . . . .
The most recent episode, “First Night,” was outstanding. Almost too much to comment on. Echoes of Barack Obama in Silas’s declaration to his court that he no longer cares about the views of Rev. Samuels. Later, a fantastic discussion between Rev. Samuels and King Silas about sacrifice. “Hasn’t God gotten beyond that?” asks Silas.
David and Michelle being faced with temptation–and turning away from it.

Almost trivial compared to the more profound stories, but still noteworthy, was a discussion of condoms at the beginning. Prince Jack (Jonathan) takes David out for a “night on the town” with a group of army buddies. He and his mother are trying to tarnish David’s public image. There’s this scene where one of the guys passes out condoms to everyone, noting all the things you want to “keep it away from” if you don’t want a pregnancy (in other words, admitting all the ways condoms break), including “a gold-digger’s fingernails.”

It’s interesting, really. Every time I hear an overt discussion of condoms in a film or TV show, it’s about how they *break* or aren’t used properly.

Former Enforcers of the Kissinger Doctrine say it needs to be enforced more

Operative words, "theoretically" and "fantasy"

OK, so CBS News has this glowing story about a method that may *theoretically* generate “limitless” supplies of lab-created blood from dead babies (talk about about vampirism!).

We’re told that the many treatments developed using adult stem cells are “only treatments, not cures” or that they’re “snake oil,” or “untested,” or whatever other excuse they can come up with.

But in this case, for something that hasn’t even been developed or tested yet, but purely theoretical, the media’s going ga-ga, and this guy gets a multi-million dollar research grant. He’s sure sitting pretty.

Dr. Marc Turner, . . . received a multi-million dollar research grant to try to make blood in his lab from human stem cells.
“These cells are being generated from human embryonic stem cells, which themselves are generated from three-to-five-day-old human embryos,” Turner says.
Palmer explains that stem cells can be coaxed, theoretically, to grow into any human body part.”

Let’s look at that one again: embryonic “stem cells can be coaxed, theoretically, to grow into any human body part.” So, for decades, they’ve been talking about this. Has anyone actually demonstrated that it can happen????

If they’re successful, the payoff is huge: a limitless supply of blood. Dr. Gail Roboz, a New York hematologist leukemia researcher told CBS News, “We want the fantasy; we would like a purely clean and limitless blood supply[. . . .] The fantasy here — what would be phenomenal — would be if we could create infection-free blood that’s laboratory generated, so it’s not dependent on donors and their availability and their willingness to come in and donate. But rather, something that the doctors could actually mine in the laboratory and have available for patients in an as-needed basis.”

I mean, come on! “The fantasy”??? Are they medical professionals or science fiction writers?

Speaking of science fiction,

“Consider that in the history of many worlds there have always been disposable creatures. They do the dirty work. They do the work that no one else wants to do, because it’s too difficult or too hazardous. And an army of Datas, all disposable? You don’t have to think about their welfare; you don’t think about how they feel. Whole generations of disposable people.
“You’re talking about slavery.”
“I think that’s a little harsh.”
I don’t think that’s a little harsh, I think that’s the truth. But that’s a truth that we have obscured behind a… comfortable, easy euphemism. ‘Property.’ But that’s not the issue at all, is it?”
–Guinan and Captain Jean-Luc Picard, “The Measure of a Man,” Star Trek: The Next Generation.

Or a comfortable euphemism of “choice.” Or a comfortable euphemism of “discarded embryo.” Or a comfortable euphemism of “scientific integrity,” as our president puts it.

Angelina Jolie wants 8 kids

Apparently, she’s never heard of Bill Gates or Warren Buffett

I haven’t read the article beyond the snippet on my blog roll. Usually I do, but my blood pressure can only handle so much of the hate and invective on Reproductive Health Reality Check.

But this writer is wishing she had a billion dollars to “improve access” to birth control in third world countries. Apparently, she’s never heard of Bill Gates or Warren Buffett, who, individually or combined, have probably spent at least that much, because it’s their main “charitable cause.”

Then let’s add the tons of money the UN and the US specifically pour into “population control.”

Human Life International has done numerous exposes of the amount of money the International Planned Parenthood Federation spends on bribing medical professionals, media personalities and politicians in third world nations to advance its agenda.

They really can’t think of a *better* way to spend those billions, like maybe actually providing food or education or alternative energy???

It’s like the “bail-out.” “Families are in debt. Small businesses are going out of business. But we’ll give trillions of dollars to the corporations that caused this mess.” Even the few “trickle down” measures, like the $8000 construction credit, really just serve as welfare to the building corporations that over-built to begin with.

So Randall Terry did some good, after all?

Deal Hudson reports that the bishops of Washington and Arlington, Donald Wuerl and Paul Loverde, have said they’ll uphold Kansas City Bishop Joseph Naumann’s order that Governor Kathleen Sebelius–when she is almost inevitably appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services (aka Eugenicist in Chief)–should refrain from the altar when she lives in the DC area.

Hudson points out that a big difference in this situation–pointed out by Archbishop Burke himself–is how the emphasis is on Sebelius *refraining* from Communion, as opposed to overtly *denying* her Communion. On the other hand, now that they have said this, it eliminates excuses. If Sebelius were to present herself, and any priest, deacon or EMC would grant her the Blessed Sacrament, it would undoubtedly create a firestorm in the New Media.

It also sets a precedent, solving the issue of the dual status of many government types. Now, if their “home bishops” say something, Wuerl and Loverde will back it up.

But what’s *most* interesting is how certain sites have been dissing Randall Terry and his recent visit to the Vatican.

We’ve been told, again, that Burke is an “embarrassment” and a “rogue” and a “blowhard.” We’ve been told that Terry is an opportunist (he may well be; I don’t really know much about the man except that he’s done a lot of good for unborn babies). We’ve been told that it’s hypocritical of “conservatives” to say “the Church is not a democracy” yet lobby the Vatican.

Let’s see. When liberals “lobby the Vatican,” they usually get shut out completely. When conservatives “lobby the Vatican,” they’re at least listened to (except on the whole Mediatrix thing, at least).

When Call to Action did its “We Are Church” petition about 10 years ago, its representatives were not even let in the Vatican. Meanwhile, two teenagers from Seton High School in Northern Virginia did a “We are Catholic” petitoin to counter-protest, got a lot more signatures than Call to Action did, and got an audience with John Paul II.

When Bernard Cardinal Law wanted inclusive language in the Catechism, Fr. Fessio and Mother Angelica “lobbied the Vatican,” and the inclusive language was shot down.

A few years later, Cardinal Mahony tried to go to the Vatican and get Mother Angelica put out of business. After fuming and posturing against Mother Angelica for months, he practically stormed the Congregation for Clergy, was called in for a private meeting with JPII, and left the Vatican defeated, never mentioning Mother Angelica–or the pastoral letter she condemned on the air–again. Meanwhile, the Pope sent Mother Angelica a monstrance.

So, now, Randall Terry goes to the Vatican specifically regarding Loverde and Wuerl, and–lo and behold!–they’re changing their tunes.

In related news, the Pope has apparently thought better of having a Jesuit in charge of his press office.

When did "Zealous" become a bad word?

Dallas Morning News describes Archbishop Raymond Burke as “one of the most outspoken (some would say zealous) defenders of the Catholic prohibition against abortion.”

Shortly before Fr. James Haley–one of the best homilists I’ve ever heard–was suspened by Bishop Paul Loverde, he said, “People say I’m too zealous.”

When did “zealous” become a bad word? It’s apparently a bad word in the minds of many Catholics, who call zeal “extremism” or “fanaticism.”

First, let’s look at the Psalms. The Church encourages us to base our prayers on them, but if you try quoting them (particularly Psalm 15 or Psalm 127) in Catholic circles, watch out!

“Because zeal for your house consumes me, I am scorned by those who scorn you. ” (Psalm 69:10, quoted as “zeal for your house will consume me” in John 2:17).

“I am intensely jealous for Zion, stirred to jealous wrath for her. ” (Zechariah 8:2)
“[Elijah] I have been most zealous for the LORD, the God of hosts, but the Israelites have forsaken your covenant, torn down your altars, and put your prophets to the sword. I alone am left, and they seek to take my life.” (1 Kings 19:10; Carmelite Motto)

Another Bishop Speaks out on Notre Dame: this time it’s Timothy Dolan

Which makes things look promising for NYC

_The Wanderer_ on Land of Lakes

According to writer Christopher Manion, both the former Bishop of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Leo Pursley, DD, and the former superior general of the Congregation of the Holy Cross, Fr. Christopher O’Toole, CSC. They had their respective roles during the 1960s, and both had oversight over Notre Dame during the fallout from Vatican II, particularly the Land of Lakes Conference. Both said that they had failed in their duties.

In 1974, I attended a meeting designed to probe the possibilities of rescuing Catholic education from the nebulous but ubiquitous “ . . . Why were these two luminaries interested in supporting efforts to preserve orthodox education for the next generation of college students? Their answer was blunt. “I’m doing penance,” said Fr. O’Toole, somberly. And Bishop Pursley nodded in agreement.
. . .
That afternoon, both men agreed that, as far as Notre Dame was concerned, they had failed.
. . .
In 1967, a group of Catholic educators, led by Notre Dame President Theodore M. Hesburgh, met at Land O’Lakes, Wis., and formally declared their independence from the Catholic Church. Alas, their motives were less than noble.
Just two years before, LBJ’s Omnibus Education Act had opened the floodgates to federal funding of higher education, and Catholic colleges wanted a place at the trough. Notre Dame quickly adopted a lay board of trustees so it could receive federal money, and only a year later the other shoe fell when numerous Notre Dame faculty and religious roundly denounced Humanae Vitae.
. . .
In a 2007 Wanderer interview, Archbishop Raymond Burke zeroed in on Land O’Lakes as a central catalyst of decline in Catholic education. “ So much was undone,” he said, “ and there’s a mentality [ that] entered into the universities by which those people who dedicated their lives to Catholic education believe that they could not be an excellent university and at the same time be faithful to the Church’s teaching and discipline. That is a fundamental error, and it takes a lot to undo it.”

That basically sums up the three factors that created the sad state of Catholic higher education, Catholic education, the priesthood, and the Church in America: a) the “Spirit of Vatican II”; b) the rejection of Humanae Vitae; c) the desire to take advantage of federal largesse.

My mother, having seen several priests of her generation leave, also attributes the crisis in the Church to men who became priests to avoid the draft.

If I had a dollar for every time I’ve been told, in a Catholic institution, “We can’t teach that here, because not everyone is Catholic.” Or, “If we taught that here, we’d lose government funding.”

That’s the argument Maggie Gallagher made years ago regarding vouchers: it’s just an avenue for the government to get its grips on religious schools, and/or to give administrators of religious schools more of an excuse to water down their teachings.

Proving what I’m always saying about football being Notre Dame’s real religion, Manion reports,

University spokesman Dennis Brown cannot reveal the amount the school receives from NBC, but a source in NBC’s New York headquarters says that Notre Dame receives more from NBC than it receives from all alumni giving.And what about that federal money? Brown tells The Wanderer that, in a typical year, Notre Dame receives about eighty million dollars in federal grants.

And Notre Dame’s biggest orthodox credential is retiring soon:

“Ralph McInerny, who retires this year after teaching philosophy at Notre Dame for 54 years, blames it on the university’s “truly vulgar lust to be welcomed into secular society.'”

Interesting comment.

Success Stories from 40 Days for Life

Casey backs out of St. Vincent’s Appearance

Casey has been criticized by some conservative Catholic groups, including
the Cardinal Newman Society, for his positions on federal funding of
contraception and legalization of same-sex marriages. The Newman group protested
when Casey spoke at Catholic University in 2006, where Casey received his law
degree.

The Choir Does Need to be Preached To

My wife lost a friend recently.

An internet friend, with whom she’s corresponded on a listserv for several years now. They saw each other as kindred spirits.

This woman was a very devout, conservative, pro-life convert, former Baptist. She and her husband were certified Couple to Couple League instructors. Her husband, also a convert, was a Gulf War (1991) veteran. He suffers from some serious mental illnesses.

I forget how many children they have total, but, when their fifth or sixth child was born, the wife suffered a serious cardiovascular childbirth complication and nearly died. Their families, hostile to the Church, offered little help. The doctors said she should never get pregnant again or she’d die.

Her husband had almost a total mental breakdown at one point. He went in the hospital for a while. She found out horrible things about him she hadn’t known. His counselors convinced him that his wife and kids were the problem. When he got out of the hospital, he left her for a while.

He committed emotional, if not physical, adultery.

It was a mess, but, eventually, he came back. They reconciled.

They were trained CCLI instructors, but she struggled with her own charts. Trying to “do it all,” she hit the usual barriers: Mass, the kids, the finances, education, etc. She considered giving up homeschoolnig and sending her kids to Catholic school, but it was too expensive, and the school wouldn’t offer assistance.

The response to their struggles was “abstain completely,” but that wasnt’ an option. They conceived a baby on what they thought was a “safe day.”

That was in early 2008. For forgiving her wayward husband and being radically open to life (living very profoundly the teaching of Casti Connubii), she was shunned by her real world Catholic “friends” and by her parish. Rather than helping her, people condemned her.

This horrible election happened. 54% of Catholics voted for Barack Obama. She lives in the Atlanta area. Her bishop, Wilton Gregory, not only failed to *oppose* Obama but actively spoke and wrote in favor of him.

Her husband, in the meantime, had a vasectomy. A few months later, he decided to make one last attempt at reconciliation with the Church. In his extremely frail psychology and spirituality, he came for one last plea before he succumbed, relative to the Church, to despair.

He came to Confession. There was a long line. The priest came promptly out when the scheduled time for Confessions was over, and said that Confessions were over; disperse.

So he did. Her husband turned his back on the Church that daily, feeling the Church had turned Her back on him.

They began talking with some Mormon missionaries. They left the Church.

This woman who was trying to live the Gospel so radically was driven away from the Church by the spiritual neglect of her pastors and the pharissaism of the laity.

One of the claims being levied against Bishops like Raymond Burke, Charles Chaput and Thomas Tobin is that they’re just ‘rallying the troops’ or ‘preaching to the choir,’ and that they’re not ‘winning converts’ or ‘convincing anyone in the middle.’

But the “faithful” do need to be preached to. The Church takes “orthodox Catholics” for granted . Those of us who believe the Church’s teachings can be kept in line, they figure, by our fear of going to Hell if we leave. They don’t stop to think that maybe the older brother on the porch needs some love and attention, especially when the older brother has only recently come back from his own sojourn of prodigality.

But there are always the Rod Drehers, and sometimes I wonder if Rod Dreher has a point.

I don’t at all condone Mary’s friend’s apostasy to the Mormon cult. Mormonism is so obviously a false religion, I can’t see how anyone believes it other than by brainwashing or demonic possession. But I have a hard time faulting anyone who joins the Orthodox Church or the Society of St. Pius X.

Her friend received many replies online–including from Mary–to her apostasy that she refused to dialogue any further. Mary wrote to Wilton Gregory, telling him he was responsible for these lost sheep, that his scandalous leadership drove them from the Church, and he should seek them out, personally, and bring them back to the fold. She never heard back.

The Choir does need to be preached to. Our faith does need to be nourished. It gets very discouraging. The job of priests and bishops is to teach and preach and inspire the laity. *Our* job is to engage the world, in whatever appropriate style we feel called.
But we need support.

When we see our pastors and our ordinaries kowtowing to rich elites and to politicians who deny the Natural Law, we get discouraged. We need an example.

We need encouragement and strength. As Bishop Tobin wrote ten years ago regarding Mother Angelica, conservative Catholics get criticized for being “angry,” yet we’ve been marginalized since the 1960s for merely trying to teach and practice what Catholicism always taught and practiced before the 1960s. We’ve been told our opinions don’t matter, that we’re obsolete, that we’re unChristian.

We try to fight the evil in the world. We see all the anti-Catholic positions out there, and then we see our fellow Catholics agreeing with those positions.

Then we look to religions like Mormonism, and Islam and Orthodoxy, and fundamentalist Christianity. Depending upon whcih aspects of the faith are most important to us, we see in those religions a similar zeal, or a similar devotion, or a similar respect for Natural Law.

We see in those religions a sense of community, that they have a functioning “ghetto system,” and it works quite well. Go look up Mormonism in the phone book. Mormons have “services” for every aspect of life, listed in the phone book, based out of their local “temple.”

That’s why people leave the Church for these other religions: they *want* the “Catholic ghetto,” and Catholics don’t have it. They want bishops who actually act like shepherds, and they figure ,”If he’s not going to try and keep me in the fold, then obviously Catholicism isn’t that important to him. If it’s so unimportant to a bishop, why should it be important to me?”

Wow! A Great Piece on the Dangers of Modernism in the Church

Found it on “Catholic Sensibility” blog, where they think Roger Mahony is a conservative. Their review/analysis of the piece was all I read at first, and their tone was that author James Kalb is a hypocrite, condemning “liberals” for things “Republicans” also do.

Yet it is very clear from the original article that Kalb is criticizing “liberals,” in the Classical sense, of both the Left and the Right. He says that Vatican II only embraced “liberal Modernism” as the least of the evils when faced with Fascist Modernism and Marxist Modernism, but that the admixture of Modernism and Catholicism is still dangerous to the faith.

What’s especially impressive is that this comes to us via Zenit, owned by the anti-traditionalist Legion of Christ.

Cardinal Stafford: Bankers must repent

It’s funny. When James Francis Cardinal Stafford criticized Barack Obama, the media called for him to “apologize.”
Now that he condemns corrupt bankers, his name is all over th eplace. However, there are some who are still saying the Church has no business in economics, which is really laughable.

Now, would *someone* at the Vatican please talk about the real cause of this economic crisis?

An appeal to Catholics on the Internet from a different "Fr. Z.’

all caps are his, not mine.

Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 9:14 PM
Subject: (no subject)
II Chron. 7:14

AFTER A DAY OF CONTEMPLATION AND SOUL SEARCHING, I HAVE DECIDED TO REACH OUT TO MY FRIENDS AND RELATIVES AND ASK YOU TO DO SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN TROUBLING ME FOR A LONG TIME.
OUR NATION IS/HAS BEEN ON THE SLIPPERY SLOPE FOR A LONG TIME. IF YOU LOOK AROUND YOU WILL FIND CORRUPTION, GREED, MORAL DECAY AND A STEADY MOVE AWAY FROM THE THINGS THAT MADE US GREAT. THE PRINCIPLES UPON WHICH THIS NATION WAS FOUNDED ARE NO LONGER OUR BACKBONE. HOWEVER, WE CAN REVERSE THIS TREND.
IN GOD’S WORD HE STATES,”IF MY PEOPLE WHO ARE CALLED BY MY NAME WILL HUMBLE THEMSELVES, AND PRAY AND SEEK MY FACE, AND TURN FROM THEIR WICKED WAYS, THEN I WILL HEAR FROM HEAVEN, AND WILL FORGIVE THEIR SIN AND HE AL THEIR LAND.”
I AM CONVINCED THAT WE MUST PRAY FOR OUR NATION AND ITS LEADERS AND ASK FOR FORGIVENESS. SO I ASK YOU TO JOIN ME IN THIS PLEA TO OUR LORD.
WOULD YOU PLEASE SEND THIS TO AT LEAST 25 PEOPLE IN YOUR ADDRESS BOOK, (SEND IT TO ALL OF THEM). ASK THEM TO PRAY EVERYDAY. 25 TO THE 5TH POWER IS 9,765,625 PEOPLE. IMAGINE IF EACH PERSON REACHES TEN OTHERS. IF YOU DO AND THEY COMPLY, WE WILL LIFT UP MILLIONS OF PRAYERS A DAY TO OUR CREATOR. HE WILL HEAR US AND IN FAITH WILL ANSWER.
Let me just add a quote from Ronald Reagan –
“If we ever forget that we’re one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.”
I truly believe this is why the United States of America is in the shape we are in today. Most people have forgotten that we are ONE NATION UNDER GOD! Let us as Christians stand up and remind people of this.~ Have a Blessed Day!

In Christ’s Peace
Fr. John Zimmerman
St. Ann’s Parish
113 South Kemp Street
Florence, SC 29506
843/661-5012

The Choir Does Need to be Preached To

My wife lost a friend recently.

An internet friend, with whom she’s corresponded on a listserv for several years now. They saw each other as kindred spirits.

This woman was a very devout, conservative, pro-life convert, former Baptist. She and her husband were certified Couple to Couple League instructors. Her husband, also a convert, was a Gulf War (1991) veteran. He suffers from some serious mental illnesses.

I forget how many children they have total, but, when their fifth or sixth child was born, the wife suffered a serious cardiovascular childbirth complication and nearly died. Their families, hostile to the Church, offered little help. The doctors said she should never get pregnant again or she’d die.

Her husband had almost a total mental breakdown at one point. He went in the hospital for a while. She found out horrible things about him she hadn’t known. His counselors convinced him that his wife and kids were the problem. When he got out of the hospital, he left her for a while.

He committed emotional, if not physical, adultery.

It was a mess, but, eventually, he came back. They reconciled.

They were trained CCLI instructors, but she struggled with her own charts. Trying to “do it all,” she hit the usual barriers: Mass, the kids, the finances, education, etc. She considered giving up homeschoolnig and sending her kids to Catholic school, but it was too expensive, and the school wouldn’t offer assistance.

The response to their struggles was “abstain completely,” but that wasnt’ an option. They conceived a baby on what they thought was a “safe day.”

That was in early 2008. For forgiving her wayward husband and being radically open to life (living very profoundly the teaching of Casti Connubii), she was shunned by her real world Catholic “friends” and by her parish. Rather than helping her, people condemned her.

This horrible election happened. 54% of Catholics voted for Barack Obama. She lives in the Atlanta area. Her bishop, Wilton Gregory, not only failed to *oppose* Obama but actively spoke and wrote in favor of him.

Her husband, in the meantime, had a vasectomy. A few months later, he decided to make one last attempt at reconciliation with the Church. In his extremely frail psychology and spirituality, he came for one last plea before he succumbed, relative to the Church, to despair.

He came to Confession. There was a long line. The priest came promptly out when the scheduled time for Confessions was over, and said that Confessions were over; disperse.

So he did. Her husband turned his back on the Church that daily, feeling the Church had turned Her back on him.

They began talking with some Mormon missionaries. They left the Church.

This woman who was trying to live the Gospel so radically was driven away from the Church by the spiritual neglect of her pastors and the pharissaism of the laity.

One of the claims being levied against Bishops like Raymond Burke, Charles Chaput and Thomas Tobin is that they’re just ‘rallying the troops’ or ‘preaching to the choir,’ and that they’re not ‘winning converts’ or ‘convincing anyone in the middle.’

But the “faithful” do need to be preached to. The Church takes “orthodox Catholics” for granted . Those of us who believe the Church’s teachings can be kept in line, they figure, by our fear of going to Hell if we leave. They don’t stop to think that maybe the older brother on the porch needs some love and attention, especially when the older brother has only recently come back from his own sojourn of prodigality.

But there are always the Rod Drehers, and sometimes I wonder if Rod Dreher has a point.

I don’t at all condone Mary’s friend’s apostasy to the Mormon cult. Mormonism is so obviously a false religion, I can’t see how anyone believes it other than by brainwashing or demonic possession. But I have a hard time faulting anyone who joins the Orthodox Church or the Society of St. Pius X.

Her friend received many replies online–including from Mary–to her apostasy that she refused to dialogue any further. Mary wrote to Wilton Gregory, telling him he was responsible for these lost sheep, that his scandalous leadership drove them from the Church, and he should seek them out, personally, and bring them back to the fold. She never heard back.

The Choir does need to be preached to. Our faith does need to be nourished. It gets very discouraging. The job of priests and bishops is to teach and preach and inspire the laity. *Our* job is to engage the world, in whatever appropriate style we feel called.
But we need support.

When we see our pastors and our ordinaries kowtowing to rich elites and to politicians who deny the Natural Law, we get discouraged. We need an example.

We need encouragement and strength. As Bishop Tobin wrote ten years ago regarding Mother Angelica, conservative Catholics get criticized for being “angry,” yet we’ve been marginalized since the 1960s for merely trying to teach and practice what Catholicism always taught and practiced before the 1960s. We’ve been told our opinions don’t matter, that we’re obsolete, that we’re unChristian.

We try to fight the evil in the world. We see all the anti-Catholic positions out there, and then we see our fellow Catholics agreeing with those positions.

Then we look to religions like Mormonism, and Islam and Orthodoxy, and fundamentalist Christianity. Depending upon whcih aspects of the faith are most important to us, we see in those religions a similar zeal, or a similar devotion, or a similar respect for Natural Law.

We see in those religions a sense of community, that they have a functioning “ghetto system,” and it works quite well. Go look up Mormonism in the phone book. Mormons have “services” for every aspect of life, listed in the phone book, based out of their local “temple.”

That’s why people leave the Church for these other religions: they *want* the “Catholic ghetto,” and Catholics don’t have it. They want bishops who actually act like shepherds, and they figure ,”If he’s not going to try and keep me in the fold, then obviously Catholicism isn’t that important to him. If it’s so unimportant to a bishop, why should it be important to me?”

"I Danced in the Morning": Pagan worship disguised as Catholicism

I’m surprised that, in all my reading about liturgy in _Adoremus_, _Crisis_, etc., I have never come across this before.

I’ve read articles about inclusive language, about how songs where we sing the lines of God (“Here I Am Lord”, “I am the Bread of Life,” “Blest are They,” etc.) confuse the roles of God and us, and can be seen as promoting “New Age” (really Gnostic) beliefs about people becoming God.

I’ve seen articles about tastelessness, improper clarity on the Eucharist, etc. Articles on the alleged homosexuality of ex-priest Dan Schutte or the fact that Marty Haugen isn’t even Catholic and is hostile to certain moral teachings of the Church.

But I have *never* seen an article talking about the real ideology behind “I Danced in the Morning.”

It turns out that the “Lord of the Dance” is a Hindu God, Nataraja. The article I cited the other day on the New Age talks about Fr. Bede Griffiths, OSB. I was wondering why I knew the name: he was a former student and close friend of C. S. Lewis.

Griffiths was a Benedictine who eventually adopted an almost totally Hindu style of religion and monastic life, one of the founders of the movement that has infected Catholicism with Hindu beliefs.

According to Dr. John Shea, in “The Church and the New Age Movement”:

Siva Nataraja, the Cosmic Dancer, has become for many of different
backgrounds, the symbol of Creative Energy. “The Supreme Intelligence dances in
the soul… for the purpose of removing our sin” (Unmai Vilakkam – Tamil text).
The late Father Bede Griffiths, O.S.B., has stated that Christians must see
Nataraja as the symbol of the risen Christ. The danger in his Neo-Hindu
Christianity has been described as “a superficial attempt to give Hindu concepts
Christian meaning and Christian concepts Hindu meaning. The result is a system
which is neither truly Hindu nor Christian.”
Footnote: Robert Fastiggi (Associate Professor of Religious Studies at St.
Edward’s University, Austin, TX), and Jose Periera, Crisis, 1814, ½
N. Street NW, Washington, D.C.
Read the above-linked Wikipedia article and then consider the lyrics to “I
Danced in the Morning.”

It is Nataraja Shiva, not Jesus Christ, who allegedly “Danced in the morning when the world was begun”.

If someone wrote a song where “Jesus” sang something like, “I am the Sun, and I rise in my chairiot in the morning!”–wouldn’t we see the obvious reference to Apollo?

I mean, it’s one thing to say that pagan deities prefigure Christ, to help point people to the True God.
It’s one thing to say we can “plunder the Egyptians” and use the pagan myths for allegorical purposes.
And there’s nothing wrong with some poetic language (though the primary purposes of hymnody should be prayer and catechesis, and poetic license should not impede those functions).

But when one sees the intentional movement of some Catholics to try and integrate Catholicism with Hinduism or Buddhism, and then we see that a hymn is based as much on Hindu “scriptures” as on the Bible, that ought to raise a serious red flag.

Wow! A Great Piece on the Dangers of Modernism in the Church

Found it on “Catholic Sensibility” blog, where they think Roger Mahony is a conservative. Their review/analysis of the piece was all I read at first, and their tone was that author James Kalb is a hypocrite, condemning “liberals” for things “Republicans” also do.

Yet it is very clear from the original article that Kalb is criticizing “liberals,” in the Classical sense, of both the Left and the Right. He says that Vatican II only embraced “liberal Modernism” as the least of the evils when faced with Fascist Modernism and Marxist Modernism, but that the admixture of Modernism and Catholicism is still dangerous to the faith.

What’s especially impressive is that this comes to us via Zenit, owned by the anti-traditionalist Legion of Christ.

Why are we Catholic?

As I’ve often said, the problem with most “Catholic” groups in contemporary public life is that they are not particularly Catholic.
I don’t mean that they’re necessarily un-Catholic, but that there’s nothing particularly to identify them as Catholic, other than their claim to so being. A recent post at Vox Nova touches on this idea, but from a different direction.

What I mean is that Catholic organizations of the Right and the Left try their best to “fit in”. Even ALL tries to distance itself from the label of being “Catholic.”

If the basis for condemning freemasonry, as I’ve discussed and quoted before, is that freemasonry doesn’t distinguish between religious differences, the same is true of most “Catholic” groups in American public life. Liberal Catholics regularly ally themselves with Marxists, Hindus, and people from other non-Catholic belief systems, emphasizing “what brings us together” over “what divides.”

Similarly, many pro-life Catholics see no problem with being involved with groups like Focus on the Family (which, sadly, given its endorsement of contraception by married couples, has a very subsidiarist name).

I mean, I admire C. S. Lewis greatly. He’s obviously one of the patrons of this website. But I also realize he has serious flaws from a Catholic perspective. I just consider him one of the best that non-Catholic thought has to offer.

I always say that the main reason I am the kind of Catholic I am is that I’ve always studied the saints–their lives and writings–since I was a little kid. I try to live the faith that they did, albeit imperfectly.

But you don’t see a lot about the Saints on most Catholic sites. You might see pretty pictures. You might see pithy quotations. Liberals like to quote John XXIII’s statement about “in questionable matters, liberty; in certain matters, unity; in all things, charity,” or whatever. They like to quote “preach the Gospel always ;if necessary use words.”

But, when you go to Catholics United, or Vox Nova, or National Catholic Reporter, how often do you see specific quotations or anecdotes from St. Thomas Aquinas or St. John of the Cross or St. Ignatius of Antioch or St. Teresa of Avila or St. Pio?

The best most liberal Catholic sites can muster is Dorothy Day, and the argument can be made that, had she lived longer, Dorothy Day would probably have been a “Reagan Democrat.”

You also don’t see much about saints on “conservative” sites, at least not in the sense of addressing the whys of things. You see more talk about Tolkein and Chesterton than Jerome or Louis of France or Tarcisius

You might see pithy quotes from or about St. Pio or St. Maximilan Kolbe, but you don’t really see passages being discussed from _The Imitation of Christ_ or _The Introduction to the Devout Life_ to show what they should tell us about our lives as laity, particularly in our political and social action.

Where is the expression of the hope to die before ever commiting a mortal sin among those whose primary raison d’etre is to figure out just how much they can compromise with the world and still be Catholic?

How would most “let’s be civil” American Catholics today react to knowing more about St. Martin of Tours than that he cut half his cloak off and gave it to a begger. I grew up thinking that’s all he ever did. I knew it would say, “St. Martin of Tours, bishop,” but I somehow had it in my head that he did that thing with the beggar while he was a soldier, and then he got executed by Rome for doing it.

In reality, St. Martin of Tours led a long and controversial life as a bishop, including making a habit of burning down pagan temples.

Do you use the Church to push your political agenda? Or do you use your political agenda to promote the Church?

One of the most laughable accusations of the fastly regenerating Catholic Left (including many Republicans who’ve been comfortable with the view that “The Catholic Church began with Vatican II”) is that pro-lifers are a group of Republican activists who are trying to use the Church to push our political agenda.

This image is not helped by certain people who really are Republican activists.

However, I find this particular straw man highly laughable. It’s like Hillary Clinton’s “vast right wing conspiracy.”

Yes, one could argue that the pro-life movement is, in political terms, a “conspiracy.” We tend to read the same books, read the same magazines, read the same websites, listen to the same speakers, etc. It’s also just called a movement. It’s nothing surreptitious.
Just like all liberal Catholics read the same literature, and they have a few common leaders like Chris Korzen and Joan Chittister (is she even bothering to go by “Sister” anymore).

Technically, a conspiracy has to be a secret, and there’s no secret here, except to those who really don’t care.

We pro-lifers may listen to Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity, but only because of mainstream access. Given our druthers, we’d rather listen to Fr. Groeschel, Fr. Euteneuer or Fr. Pavone.

We’re accused of seeking our own Obama-type “political savior” just because we have some heroes.

The Cardinal Newman Society is hardly a Republican organization. Its goal is not to get any Republicans elected to political office . Its goal is to renew our Catholic Colleges and make sure they’re *Catholic*. On several occasions, the US Bishops have said that those who hold pro-choice views should not speak or be honoredin Catholic venues. No less a liberal than Bishop Donald “God is a She, and I wear pink glasses, and I like hiding tabernacles in closets” Trautman was actually one of the first bishops to publicly censure a pro-choice politician, when he banned Republican Tom Ridge from speaking in institutinos of the Diocese of Erie, particularly Ridge’s alma mater, Cathedral Prep High School.

So how could the work of the Cardinal Newman Society in its “Commencement Speaker Watch” be considered Republican partisanship ? Pro-life partisanship ? Darn tootin’.

For example, the Newman Society highlighted a visit by John McCain to Villanova, emphaszing that McCain’s support for embryonic stem cell research negates his claim to being “pro-life.”

There is one major pro-life organization which seems more interested in promoting the Republican cause than in the pro-life cause: the National Right to Life Committee. NRLC is not a Catholic organization, in principle or in foundation. I don’t even know who its current president is. I don’t check its website for “pro-life news,” because _Gonzalez v. Carhart_ was the straw that broke the camel’s back for me: I haven’t trusted NRLC since they supported the verdict in _Planned Parenthood v. Casey_. These so-called incrementalists apparently don’t really care about proceeding in their increments, because they’re still hung up on partial birth abortion which, at least at present, is against federal law.

I don’t see NRLC making a comment about politicians receiving communion, for various reasons. One major reason would be that NRLC is pro-contraception, and NRLC is in favor of the use of medical treatments derived from fetal tissue research, arguing that the use of those treatments does not constitute endorsement.

OK, so what other “Republican activist” groups are there? Oh, yeah, American Life League and Human Life International, both of which have recently condemned Sen. Sam Brownback as a traitor for his support for Kathleen Sebellius. Both of which have led the charge against Michael Steele for his ambiguous statements on abortion.

How exactly are ALL and HLI “Republican” front groups trying to push their agenda on the Church?